You wrote: >It is easy to prove that RBC has fielded units. From the perspective of an >end user, I would rather a rebreather company spend its time and money on >making the unit safe, than having a brilliant advertising and marketing >scheme. And sure, not having made arrangements to get an "already sold" unit >back from the field, once they found that the company doing the assembly of >the new units would not make the departure date for TEK & DEMA, was a >marketing blunder....but I'll say it again, safety is not about glitz at >DEMA. Safety and function will arise from good engineering, and are in NO >WAY DEPENDENT ON MARKETING OR SALES EFFORTS. I guess that I subscribe to a pratical rule: if a company can't plan to achieve a demo unit for a show that is at the same time every year (once they are in production), they most likely lack some management/planning skills that I believe to be integral to them producing a reliable product. Secondly, if the "main company" is subbing out the production, then I'd rather know about the company actually doing the real work. As you say, I'm not interested in the sales company. Last point on this topic: most authorities on quality (and reliability) will tell you that the whole company affects the quality function. If sales and marketing can't plan, then who in the company can? >Gee that sounds like a strong arguement for relying on dive computers. Funny >thing, my BC is over 6 years old with thousands of dives on it, and not one >failure to its mechanical system----I would not expect an electronic BC to >fare so well. An electronic BC? I guess I get your point. Mine is that the ELECTRONICS themselves do not add to the whole system failure rate in any meaningful way. >I think you have too much time in the office, proving theories on paper, and >not enough in the water ;) Here's a little bit about my "theories" I've designed and managed the development of several life support systems in the medical field. I've performed vulnerability analysis of life support systems for various government agencies including all branches of the military and NASA. I have been part of numerous crash analysis teams, and I've buried a few friends who were on the losing side of experiemental "failure proof" mechanical based systems. I'm happy diving "sport" depths, but am interested in rebreathers because a lot of the diving I've done in the past involved fairly long hikes and moving equipment through difficult terrain. I'm interested in reducing the "tonnage" of equipment for those situations. > Not to >>get off topic, but if you fly, drive a car, ride a train, have many >>different medical procedures, you ARE trusting your life to >>electronics. > >I have never heard of a plane crashing due to electronic failure ? Do you fly?> If so you DO trust your life to electronics. >I have never met anyone who has had to bring there car to the shop to get >the lousy electronic mess fixed??? You bet you have. And some people die because of it. But then the Pinto gas tank had no electronics, and more people died from rear ending crashes than engine control module failures. I'm pretty certain that the first sport scuba divers had the same things said about diving without a surface supply of air. And the single hose regulator caused a ruckus. Some countries did not allow you to dive with a BC as a flotation device (a separate horsecollar was needed). Henry -- //////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// /Henry Davis / New Product Consulting / /Henry Davis Consulting / Specializing in product life / /3 Russell Circle / cycle for high tech products. / /Natick, Ma 01760 / Market Segmentation, Product / /ph:(508)651-9122 fax:651-2032 / Definition, Prototyping, / / hdavis@ix*.ne*.co* / Market Readiness, Introduction / ////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
Navigate by Author:
[Previous]
[Next]
[Author Search Index]
Navigate by Subject:
[Previous]
[Next]
[Subject Search Index]
[Send Reply] [Send Message with New Topic]
[Search Selection] [Mailing List Home] [Home]